Richard Dawkins has written a new book for children that compares scientific explanations with supernatural ones. Catholic writer Cristina Odone believes an education without religion is missing a crucial dimension. Susanna Rustin brings atheist and believer together.

Richard Dawkins: I've got an idiosyncratic view that evolution could be taught to very young children.

Cristina Odone: I have no problem with the teaching of evolution in science just as I have no problem with the teaching of creation in religious studies. But I think it's very important that religious studies should be taught at school – they bring out different dimensions.

RD: I'm strongly in favour of comparative religion being taught. Modern schoolchildren are lamentably ignorant of the Bible.

Susanna Rustin: Isn't there a difference between learning about religion and the religious teaching that goes on in faith schools and Sunday schools?

CO:Faith schools have to do comparative religion, but what distinguishes, say, my daughter's Catholic school is that they get much more – they'll begin assembly with prayer, she's had Bible readings. But the garden of Eden for her is a story, it isn't the truth. Even in faith schools our children are now being taught about religion in a very metaphorical way.

RD: The problem with that metaphorical view is that you have to decide which bits are metaphorical. Take the story of Adam and Eve. I think the official Catholic position now is that evolution is true, so Adam and Eve didn't exist in a corporeal sense. And yet if you look up the doctrine of original sin it makes heavy reference to Adam's sin. I'd be quite curious to talk to a Catholic theologian about that.

But yes, I think there is a distinction between teaching about religion, which I think we are both strongly in favour of, and teaching a child, "you belong to this religion – you are a Muslim child or you are a Jewish child" – that seems to me a very different thing and I think it's presumptuous.

CO: I'm a Catholic and my husband is an Anglican, and transubstantiation is an issue between us. Do I want my daughter to take up my Catholic beliefs? Yes I do. Do I believe my beliefs are superior in any way to his? Yes I do. But do I want to teach her that mine is the only way? No I don't. What I want her to feel is that there are some beautiful principles in all religions. In your new book you say scientists cheerfully admit they don't know, "cheerfully" because not knowing the answer is exciting. What's so funny is that I feel about religion in the same way. You musn't think that religion is stuck in its inquisitorial phase; religion is capable of evolution and many people of faith are filled with doubts.

RD: But how do you decide which bits to doubt and which bits to accept? As scientists, we do it by evidence.

CO: You can't boil everything down to evidence!

RD: But you're saying religion evolves and changes, so what are the criteria?

CO: Look at birth control. The pope has said there are no ifs or buts, this is doctrine – we must never use birth control. But how many Catholics do you think go to confession and say, "I'm sorry, I've used birth control"? Well here we are, and this is part of the evolution of theology.

RD: So why stick with it? Why call yourself a Catholic when you don't do what Catholics are supposed to?

CO: For me, Catholicism is the easiest way to feel the transcendental dimension, and if I only believed in science that would be lacking. I do believe in eternal life and that the wicked get their comeuppance and virtue is rewarded in the other world. The church offers me a very strong sense of identity – Catholicism is integral to how I see myself and it offers a guide to a way of living.

RD: So you believe in hell?

CO: I don't believe it in a physical, licking flames sense, but I do firmly believe that evil will be punished in the eternal sphere .

RD: At what stage in evolutionary history do you think that started? With Homo erectus? Homo sapiens? There must have been some sort of divide.

CO: I believe it's about free will – it was when primitive people began to make moral choices.

SR: When people talk about creationism versus evolution they usually hold up the US as an example. How much do you think we in Britain need to worry?

RD: There are some real problems in schools and universities from children brought up to believe that the Koran is literally true. But I think it's also creeping into evangelical Protestant Christianity. So I don't think it's just an American problem, I'm seriously concerned children are being misled.

CO: I spent a year visiting faith schools and I think it is very important that the state should continue to provide an umbrella for them. Once they get out of the state system and the national curriculum, anything can be taught. And unfortunately, there are parents and teachers who believe not only in creationism, but in girls not being educated beyond puberty and so on.

SR: Has the atheists-versus-believers debate run its course, or even been counterproductive?

RD: This question arises in America, where for many of my colleagues the main issue is creationism in schools. They find fault with people like me for alienating sensible religious people and I can see from a tactical point of view it might be expedient to make common cause. On the other hand, I do care passionately about the truth. But my book The Magic of Reality is not an atheist book. It's nothing to do with fighting religion in the way The God Delusion was.

CO: I would have no problem with my daughter struggling through it and one of the reasons is the tone. Many people of faith found The God Delusion very strident.

SR: Where does morality fit in your view of education?

RD:Science is about what is true; we need to have lessons in what is true and those are science lessons. But we need to have lessons in morality, as well, and I would hate it if they were regarded as the monopoly of religion. Citizenship, being social, being aware of other people's needs – all these things should be taught as civics or something.

CO: We don't have in the national curriculum morals or ethics or civics, so it does come under religious education, but I agree some of the most interesting moral philosophers have not been believers. All I ask of them is to tolerate people of faith. Intolerance squashes curiosity.

Members of Guardian Extra can buy two top-price tickets for the price of one to attend an evening with Richard Dawkins at the Royal Albert Hall on 19 October. Each ticket includes a voucher for a copy of the book. Cristina Odone's new website freefaith.com launches on Monday.